Racism is defined as "hating someone or something someone does, based solely on the color of their skin.

This whole "woke" thing is their way to make a dollar, not because they wanted their brands politically correct

I don't think "racism" is a real moral category, but I still think this whole thing is hilarious.

If they don't hate them, quit getting "offended" by them and pushing to remove their faces. There is nothing racist about the logos.

But if the logos aren't actually racist, then what's the issue?

explain to me how those logos are racist, please provide a brief contextual answer.

Uhm. The images are not racist. I think this meme makes a good point who the racists really are. Trying to understand why people are so idiotic about it aint worth my time.

I know you didn't said that, but you have justified those actions of removing those icons on purely people's feelings, a triggered group at that. Society can't be changed and moved by a group of triggered people guided by emotions.

If the logos aren't considered racist from a time that hearkens back to when they were common, then they would by default be considered bold logos that went against the prevailing paradigm...hence something to be lauded, not banned. I think, somehow, that overzealous sjws just saw a black face and got triggered.

Wouldn't those be terms of endearment then? Did black people not refer to themselves as aunts and uncles, mamas and papas? I mean, I have a friend everyone calls "Mama Lou". If she was black, would that be a problem, and if so, why? I believe the families of these "mascots" as they are so elegantly debased, have come out and said they were always fine with it. If it was racist, don't ya think they would've been the ones calling for their removal?

Last I heard, blacks, or anyone for that matter, weren't naming their kids nigg*s, but that would be f**kin hilarious to go to school with person. Perhaps if you could show when or where this was actually a racist term? That would be worth considering. To my limited knowledge, it's not been so, but I'm willing to entertain that I'm wrong on this. However, even among my black friends now, those terms are used in the context of endearment, not slang.

It's not that we don't want black people's faces on boxes and such. It's because of Aunt Jemima and uncle Ben's origins. Both of them were the stereotype of specific slaves. They were created from the false fantasy that all black people are meant to happily serve white people. Not exactly the best logo for a product sold in the land of the free.
No, the government shouldn't have to intervene. But they still shouldn't be on shelves.

If you want to look at it that way. How does it feel to always be offended over things like this? I imagine it's pretty stressful.

Would you allow a picture of a happy jew in a concentration camp as a logo?

These former slaves aren't in concentration camps or working the cotton fields. It's a picture of their face.

That doesn't hide the fact that they're slaves.

WERE slaves. They were freed. Depiction of a former slave isn't degrading them, it actually honors them. Yes, the original depictions of Aunt Jemima were racist, but news flash for you sjws, we've long since moved past those days.

But they're slave name is used instead of they're birth name which was given to them. The aunt and uncle references when they were used as slaves and because it is used on a syrup product, which could be showing that these people had to work to make syrup in they're slave years, it is even worse.